The rejection of scalar consequentialism

Utilitas 21 (1):100-116 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In Alastair Norcross argues that scalar consequentialism is the most plausible form of consequentialism, but his arguments are flawed: he is simply mistaken when he suggests that there is a problem with deriving absolutes like right and wrong from gradable properties such as goodness; he cannot justify his claim that the choice of a threshold will always be arbitrary; and his argument only shows that the consequentialist doesn't care about permissibility. Furthermore, I argue that, although Norcross was right to claim that a scalar theory can be action-guiding (to an extent), he was mistaken to think that ought If anything can be said in favour of scalar consequentialism, it is only that it is the most honest form of consequentialism, because it doesn't pretend to care about permissibility

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,139

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Rejection of Consequentialism. [REVIEW]Peter Simpson - 1986 - Philosophical Studies (Dublin) 31:525-528.
The rights and wrongs of consequentialism.Brian McElwee - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 151 (3):393 - 412.
Russell's moral philosophy.Charles Pigden - 2007 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The Rejection of Consequentialism.Elizabeth Teller - 1983 - Philosophical Books 24 (3):188-190.
The Rejection of Consequentialism. [REVIEW]John Marshall - 1987 - Review of Metaphysics 40 (4):790-792.
7 Consequentialism.Douglas W. Portmore - 2011 - In Christian Miller (ed.), Continuum Companion to Ethics. Continuum. pp. 143.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-02-05

Downloads
170 (#108,816)

6 months
7 (#285,926)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Rob Lawlor
University of Leeds

Citations of this work

Scalar consequentialism the right way.Neil Sinhababu - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (12):3131-3144.
Consequentialism.Douglas W. Portmore - forthcoming - In Christian Miller (ed.), Bloomsbury Handbook of Ethics. Bloomsbury.
The rights and wrongs of consequentialism.Brian McElwee - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 151 (3):393 - 412.
Should Utilitarianism Be Scalar?Gerald Lang - 2013 - Utilitas 25 (1):80-95.
Continuity in Morality and Law.Re’em Segev - 2021 - Theoretical Inquiries in Law 22 (1):45-85.

View all 11 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references